Bonkers Blog February 2015

Last night’s Resources Scrutiny Committee meeting seemed to me a much more relaxed affair than
the one three months ago, when the normally easy going chairman tended
towards the officious, not something I would normally associate with councillor
Stephen Hall. His is a relatively benign committee with, apart from the one who is
well known to Greenwich police, not inclined to a surfeit of irrelevant political
insults. They can go overboard on giving thanks for each other’s expertise though.

The meeting was ten minutes longer than the last one at five minutes under three
hours and observers in what passes for a gallery in the new chamber peaked at five.
A councillor from each of the two main parties and three members of the public, two of
whom had had enough and went home at the 80 minute mark.

I learned nothing fundamentally new by hanging on to the end. Cabinet member
Gareth Bacon reiterated his well practised speech about the borough’s financial
woes and how central government had chopped Bexley’s grant by a further 14%. He
has cut expenditure in his own area of responsibility by 20% (£2·86 million).

Labour councillor Daniel Francis (Belvedere) queried why once again it was
mainly the lower pay grades who were predicted to lose their jobs and Human Resources
boss Nick Hollier agreed that “the majority of staff are on those lower grades so it
follows from that that the preponderance of staff that might be affected by those
proposals will be on the lower grades.” Very helpful.

Councillor Danny Hackett (Labour, Lesnes Abbey) had spotted in an Appendix to
the Agenda that a disproportionate number of disabled people were lined up for
the chop. Nick Hollier indicated that the figures were to provide an assessment
of the situation to see if there was a need for “mitigation”. Danny’s later use
of the slogan “Working for you, ignoring you” in connection with the sham
consultation exercise was not well received by cabinet member Gareth Bacon who
nevertheless went on to say that if no alternatives were put forward, ‘ignore
you° he must.

Councillor Gill MacDonald (Labour, Belvedere) was concerned about some services
being forced entirely on line - as well she might be. My near 95 year old aunt in
Newham is now entirely cut off from council services and a phone call to the
council’s main number (no longer shown on their website) merely redirects to the
web. Councillor MacDonald was told by the cabinet member that Bexley’s services
would never be 100% web based even though the Agenda clearly stated “Only on line
contact will be available for some services”.

The bulk of the meeting was Agenda Item 9, the budget proposals, and cabinet
member Gareth Bacon said the financial circumstances were the worst he could
remember in his 17 years on the council. His aim was “to keep council tax
increases as low as it is possible to do”.

As is all too often the case the tendency is for the most pain to be inflicted on
the poorest in society. When councils took over the administration of council
tax relief in 2013 Bexley proposed that residents on benefits would have to pay
15% of the tax due (nothing previously) and introduce the levy in three steps of
5%. This is to be extended to four steps so that the poorest people will
contribute 20%, another £300,000 a year. The hardship fund, as already noted, will be
done away with.

Bexley’s Voluntary Services Council will be asked to take on more responsibilities
saving another £25k. and rewarded with a further cut to their grant.

The Citizens Advice Bureaux will be reduced from two to one. £30,000 saved
mainly at the expense of the vulnerable.

The council’s IT provider whose contract expires in March 2016 has been asked to
accept a smaller inflation based payment this year. £20,000 saved. Even the
smallest of sums are under the spotlight, though Gareth Bacon did not foresee
the loss of the web casting experiment. Director Paul Moore reminded him that it
is subject to an evaluation in May. If Teresa likes it it will stay. Not all
£20k’s are equal.

Other items of note were that the quarterly Bexley magazine has a net cost of
about £35,000 a year and that no decision had yet been made on any proposed cut
pending the consultation results and discussions in cabinet and council.

History suggests that the 1,821 budget consultation
responses will inevitably be ignored. As councillor Bacon wryly said, he
did “not expect people to say ‘brilliant’, you are taking money out of the
budget, we’ve been waiting for that all our lives”. Everyone will be against the
cuts but they are inescapable. No changes would be possible unless proposals are
forthcoming for “alternative and equivalent savings”.

There is no denying he has a very difficult job, perhaps his predecessor should have
had a better crystal ball, one less focused on getting
re-elected.

Despite Teresa O’Neill dictating that two paid vice-chairmen
be appointed to this committee, neither of them provided a report and in both cases did
nothing beyond commenting on the brilliance of their colleagues. It’s another
twenty odd thousand that could have been saved but Tory pockets are sacrosanct.

It is customary for me to report how bloody awful the sound system is but it was
really quite good last night except for one thing which affects all the meetings
arranged in that same way. The audience immediately behind the rear table hear the direct
speech from those on the rear table and a moment later what comes from the loudspeakers
at the far end of the room giving an echo effect. It may be just the one cabinet member's microphone
but it makes him difficult to follow.

I may have considered attending the meeting close to being a waste of time; as is
often the case, reading the Agenda would have taught me almost as much but what
made it worthwhile was the icy stare from the lying Cheryl Bacon. If looks could
kill! Maybe she has had a phone call from Plumstead nick.